Patna High CourtCR. MISC./62839/2024bail granted

Ajit Kumar Bharti v. The State Of Bihar

2025-01-18Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62839 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Siwan ====================================================== Ajit Kumar Bharti Son of Harendra Bharti R/O Village - Bhadaur Mathiya, P.S.- Siswan, District - Siwan.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Nilam Kumari Wife of Ajit Kumar Bharti D/o Sri Chandradev Giri, R/o vill.- Satjora Mathiya, P.S.- Daraunda, Distt.- Siwan ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. Yashraj Vardhan, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Madan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-01-2025 Heard Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Yashraj Vardhan, learned counsel for the Informant and Mr. Madan Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Siwan Mahila P.S. Case No. 44 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 21.05.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons used to torture the informant for non fulfillment of the demand of Alto car and A.C and lastly they ousted the informant from her sasural after assaulting her and snatching all her belongings.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62839 of 2024(3) dt.18-01-2025 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case merely on the ground that the petitioner is the husband of the informant. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. In fact, the parents of the informant has not sent the informant in her matrimonial house despite of best efforts of the petitioner then the petitioner has filed the Divorce Case bearing Divorce Case No. 16 of 2024 on 09.01.2024 and after notice the informant appeared in the aforesaid divorce case and thereafter in retaliation she filed the present F.I.R. on 21.05.2024 only to harass the petitioner.

5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the Informant, on the other hand, opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner .

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Siwan in connection with Siwan Mahila P.S. Case No. 44 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62839 of 2024(3) dt.18-01-2025 3/3 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions :-

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T